House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) and subcommittee Chairman Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Penn.)—Democrats who have taken the reigns of oversight of the FCC due to the party’s gains in the 2018 midterms—sent a letter to Pai on Monday requesting information and documents about the agency’s workload.

In the letter, Pallone and Doyle said it will “resume its traditional role of oversight” over the agency, a prediction made by experts shortly after Democrats took control of the House.

“Under your leadership, the FCC has failed repeatedly to act in the public interest and placed the interest of corporations over consumers,” the letter reads. “The FCC should be working to advance the goals of public safety, consumer protection, affordable access, and connectivity across the United States. To that end, it is incumbent upon the committee’s leadership and its members to oversee the activities of the FCC.”

It adds:

“Not only have you failed on numerous occasions to provide Democratic members of this committee with responses to their inquiries, you have also repeatedly denied or delayed responding to legitimate information requests from the public about agency operations. These actions have denied the public a full and fair understanding of how the FCC under your leadership has arrived at public policy decisions that impact Americans everyday in communities across the country.”

Pallone and Doyle asked Pai to update them on:

The agency’s current workload.

The work of its bureaus and field offices.

Its handling of consumer complaints.

Its handling of Freedom of Information Act requests.

To provide a “list of each letter sent to the FCC from a member of Congress to which the FCC has not yet provided a response.

The two congressmen asked that Pai respond to them by March 4. You can read their whole letter here.

"Today, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) said he would “soon” introduce a bill to permanently reinstate the net neutrality rules that were repealed by the Federal Communications Commission, led by chairman Ajit Pai, in 2017.

Markey’s announcement comes as a federal court is set to hear oral arguments over the FCC’s repeal of net neutrality regulations in 2017. Markey, who is a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, has previously introduced a bill that would permanently reinstate net neutrality as a member of the House of Representatives, although the measure ultimately failed.

It’s unclear when the bill would be formally introduced, but Markey said it was imminent. “We will soon lay down a legislative marker in the Senate in support of net neutrality to show the American people that we are on their side in overwhelming supporting a free and open internet.”

I’m at the D.C. Circuit Court where the case to save #NetNeutrality is getting its day in court. Whether in the courts or in the halls of Congress, we will fight to defend the free and open internet. pic.twitter.com/w2xwfHSPcw

— Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) February 1, 2019
A spokesperson for Markey confirmed to The Verge that the measure is a bill that would codify net neutrality rules into law.

As a result of the 2018 midterm elections, Democrats now hold a majority in the House and would likely be able to easily approve a net neutrality measure this session. However, Senate Democrats could face tougher waters, as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) may refuse to take the bill to the floor. Then, another discharge petition would be required to bring it up for a vote to bypass McConnell.

“Whether in the halls of the courts or the halls of Congress, we will fight to defend net neutrality,” Markey said in a statement today. “Nothing less than the fate of the internet is being argued in this court case, and we must do everything we can in this historic fight.”

Industry groups like the Internet Association (IA) also back Congress’ efforts to permanently codify net neutrality. In a statement today, IA said, “The internet industry stands with consumers in this fight. . . Internet Association and our member companies are as committed as ever to ensuring all Americans enjoy strong, enforceable net neutrality protections, whether it be through the courts or bipartisan legislation.”

In August, Markey, along with Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), led a bicameral effort along over 100 members in Congress in filing an amicus brief in the net neutrality case being heard today, condemning the FCC’s move to repeal net neutrality.

“Both the plain language and Congressional intent behind the Telecommunications Act of 1996 make clear that today, broadband access to the internet is a telecommunications service,” Markey said in a statement. “Yet Chairman Pai and President Trump ignored the statute and Congress’s intent when the FCC reclassified broadband back to an information service and eviscerated the net neutrality rules.”

“They are on the wrong side of history, and I believe the court will find in our favor.”"

"A Federal Communications Commission lawyer faced a skeptical panel of judges today as the FCC defended its repeal of net neutrality rules and deregulation of the broadband industry.

FCC General Counsel Thomas Johnson struggled to explain why broadband shouldn't be considered a telecommunications service, and struggled to explain the FCC's failure to protect public safety agencies from Internet providers blocking or slowing down content.

Oral arguments were held today in the case, which is being decided by a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. (Audio of the four-hour-plus oral arguments is available here.) Throttling of firefighters' data plans played a major role in today's oral arguments.

Of the three judges, Circuit Judge Patricia Millett expressed the most skepticism of Johnson's arguments, repeatedly challenging the FCC's definition of broadband and its disregard for arguments made by public safety agencies. She also questioned the FCC's claim that the net neutrality rules harmed broadband investment. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins also expressed some skepticism of FCC arguments, while Senior Circuit Judge Stephen Williams seemed more amenable to FCC arguments. (Williams previously dissented in part from a 2016 ruling that upheld the Obama-era net neutrality rules. Now the same court is considering FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's repeal of those rules.)

The lawsuit seeking to overturn the net neutrality repeal was filed by more than three dozen entities, including state attorneys general, consumer advocacy groups, and tech companies such as Mozilla and Vimeo.

"The House on Wednesday voted to reinstate Obama-era net neutrality rules prohibiting internet service providers from interfering with web traffic.

The bill passed by a 232-190 vote, mostly along party lines. Just one Republican, Rep. Bill Posey (Fla.), voted for the bill.

House Democrats pushed their measure, dubbed the Save the Internet Act, through the chamber in the face of opposition from conservative groups and Republican lawmakers, but the legislation will likely hit a wall in the GOP-controlled Senate.

Earlier this week the White House also came out in opposition with a threat to veto the bill if it makes it to President Trump’s desk.

“This is just common sense,” Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) said on the House floor during debate on Tuesday. “Each of us should be able to decide what videos we watch, which sites we read and which services we use. Nobody should be able to influence that choice — not the government and not the large companies that run the networks.”

Passing the bill was an important step for Democrats: The issue is an important one for consumer advocates and groups on the left. And the 2015 rules have been hugely popular, with polls registering support as high as 86 percent among voters of all political affiliations.

Democratic leaders including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) rallied around the bill when it was introduced last month, painting the FCC’s repeal as a massive handout to powerful telecom companies.

“We didn't come to Washington, D.C., to represent companies — we came here to represent people,” Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), who introduced the bill, said on the House floor.

Net neutrality supporters argue that without the rules and an agency like the FCC enforcing them, internet providers will have the ability to reshape the internet by favoring content from partners and businesses that pay them.

Democratic state attorneys general and consumer groups are also fighting the FCC's repeal in court. A panel of federal appeals judges is expected to decide on their lawsuit as early as this summer.

Republicans have resisted Democrats’ efforts to reinstate the rules over opposition to broadening the FCC’s oversight.

Republican lawmakers painted the Democrats’ effort as part of a “socialist agenda” with ominous warnings that setting rules for broadband providers would amount to burdensome government interference with the internet.

The GOP has introduced their own net neutrality bills that would implement prohibitions against blocking, throttling and paid prioritization. But the proposals have been nonstarters with Democrats and net neutrality advocates because they lack the enforcement mechanisms of the 2015 order, which designated broadband companies as common carriers and gave the FCC broad oversight powers.

“This legislation is a big-government solution in search of a problem,” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who pushed the repeal through in 2017, said in a statement. “The Internet is free and open, while faster broadband is being deployed across America. This bill should not and will not become law.”

Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), the ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, called on Democrats to take up his party’s proposals to codify net neutrality rules without restoring FCC oversight.

“Their solution is not real net neutrality,” Walden said in a statement. “Net neutrality does not require a government takeover of the internet. And everyone knows their bill will never become law.”

But Democrats are largely unconvinced by the GOP’s appeals.

"For the Republicans to stand here and say that they care about net neutrality rules, when they had two years when they controlled the House and the Senate and the White House," Doyle said on Tuesday. "What did they do? They did nothing."

A similar bill that would have reversed the FCC’s repeal passed the Senate last year with the help of three Republicans crossing the aisle and a procedural rule that allowed them to force a vote. The bill later stalled in the then-Republican-controlled House.

Some Senate Democrats immediately began calling for the upper chamber to take up the bill on Wednesday.

“Americans of all political stripes support putting net neutrality rules back on the books, because when you pay your monthly broadband bill, you should be able to access all the content on the internet at the same speed without interference or throttling by your broadband provider,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said in a statement. “The Senate now has a real opportunity pass the Save the Internet Act and overturn the FCC’s wrongheaded decision on net neutrality.”

But this time around, Senate Republicans have procedural power on their side, and they have made it clear that they do not intend to bring the bill up for consideration. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday the bill is “dead on arrival” in the upper chamber.

Democrats, though, have made it clear they will continue to push the issue.

“The House’s vote to reinstate net neutrality reflects the will of millions of Americans who made their voices heard that they don’t want their costs of using the Internet to go up unfairly, they do not want their freedom to be constricted, and that if they should decide to start up a business, they deserve to be on an equal playing field with their larger competitors," Schumer said in a statement.

"As the American people experience the consequences of the FCC’s misguided net neutrality decision, they’ll know it’s because Senator McConnell and Senate Republicans refused to stand up to special interests and take action to stop it when they had the chance.”